MSFS has been a showcase of just how out of date and bad Bing Maps really are. One of the biggest points of appeal for this (or any sim) is the high level of real world detail.
There have been many sims with outstanding “aircraft and dynamics realism”, but MSFS brought a promist of accurate real world scenery, weather and total immersion.
Photogrammetry is a cute trick as far as a few specific buildings in a city…but overall, the real upgrade needs to be a global map (in my opinion)
MSFS is an outstanding product, but I do think that the maps in general could use some general improvement outside of the photogrammetry key city buildings.
I understand that satellite imagery is not perfect, but I am starting to wonder if Bing is using Sputnik as their primary satelite
But your house, your street, the house next door probably hasnt changed that much I assume.
Me thinks you are looking into too much detail at these things. This isnt an atlas. Its a simulator.
if your house, street, neighbourhood, town is there then thats good going from 12000 feet.
I understand the point of this thread but when I think back to stock FSX, populated areas were displayed as generic texture tiles. SE Alaska looked like sand dunes. Other than major highways, there was nothing to resemble real world (until FScene, Orbx and others came along) Yes, that was 17 years ago and technology has come a long way since then but I expect better ground will improve bit by bit over time.
Actually, google earth has a built in flight sim, not exactly study level, but there is one.
On the other hand, the bigger question is that Bing maps is good in some parts of the world, in other parts the maps are very much outdated but more importantly of poor quality compared to the competitor.
yeah but it’s not only quality it’s quantity as well, Google PG is extremely extensive even spreading through the villages around mega cities whereas it’s just the downtown you get with Bing Maps and especially in WU PG additions, ie Tokyo, London, Paris… total number of towns with PG on Google is said to be about 5.000 as compared to a lame 341 native Bing Maps PG towns plus a few WU additions.
Server overload means that many of us struggle to get coherent data streams as it is and Google maps use 10x as much data as Bing so be careful what you wish for.
It’s just a comparison I don’t wish for anything, msfs is a pioneer in the next gen sim and i’m pretty much happy with it, it’s only Google’s scope looks unbeatable…
I’m looking at this the other way. I’m hoping that it puts a little more pressure on Microsoft and Bing to invest a little more in their aerial/satellite pics. Some areas are indeed better on Bing than Google, but that’s not the norm.
I reckon this Metaverse thingy will change all that as the old technology was never meant to be for anything but imaging fairly low res stills, newer satellites will be much more purpose built for streaming data at higher resolutions.
PC & Xbox users will just need to be patient, and in 10 years, new technologies will no doubt require greater investment and effort by MS & Asobo to satisfy the user base.
